What do you think is the biggest issue with Lemmy?
-
Uh huh, and I'm sure we can take him at his word. It's not like he's ever lied. He never gave a nod to nazis ever, like telling the proud boys to stand by. Yup, good old not racist donnie, I'm sure he totally hates white supremacists.
You wanna talk bad faith, believe anything that comes out of his orange piehole.
Misrepresenting what someone says is a textbook example of bad faith so doing that in a discussion about bad faith is ironic to say the least. What he actually thinks is unrelated to this discussion as it's about what he said. You'd call people out for twisting your words so hold yourself to the same standards.
-
Heh, I'm sure they are much better people than US conservatives, but I'll quote myself from elsehwere.
The conservatives who “can’t” post to Lemmy are the ones who don’t know how to have an actual conversation and get banned. What fraction of conservatives that represents is an excercise left to the reader. But I’ve got my own opinion on that number for sure.
Maybe you should re-read my original comment? Because unless you think that Lemmy is not a left wing echo chamber then I have no clue what you're arguing about here exactly.
-
The downvote button. It's a hobby horse of mine. Slashdot got it right: if you're going to tell someone to shut up, there should be a small price to pay.
PS: to the inevitable downvoters. Let's be clear that you are not just saying "I disagree". You are helping to hide my comment; you're literally telling me to shut up. Would you do that in person, without so much as lifting a finger to justify yourself ? Of course you wouldn't. In person you would have manners. This is the problem I have with the downvote button. It incites people to behave like uncivilized infants.
On the contrary, in real life I remove myself from conversations where people have nothing worthwhile to say every day. Half my job is judging when that's the case so I can prioritize the interactions where people are ready to be cogent and concise.
-
Not enough people for even slightly niche communities. Wanna talk about smash brothers ? 732 people, only 2 posts in the last month.
This is why people still use reddit on the side.
This is exactly why I don't use Reddit on the side. When I run out of content on Lemmy, there's no choice but to do something productive instead. Had to go 100% cold turkey on Reddit to make that work though.
-
On the contrary, in real life I remove myself from conversations where people have nothing worthwhile to say every day. Half my job is judging when that's the case so I can prioritize the interactions where people are ready to be cogent and concise.
This seems to be a reply to another comment.
-
This post did not contain any content.
Trying to be a Reddit clone.
Reddit was shit to begin with. It was a dumbed down forum site for people who found sites like Plastic or Kuro5hin too intimidating or complicated(!).
Slashdot-style upvoting would instantly solve a lot of "Reddit"-type problems, because instead of just good/bad, or like/dislike, the reason for the vote is noted, such as "insightful", "funny", etc., and you can then filter and sort comments much easier. Just filtering out "funny" comments saved soooooooo much time.
Another thing: Why don't creators of threads have the option to admin their own threads? It's their thread! It wouldn't be appropriate for discussion threads (for obvious reasons), but for interpersonal posts and questions, it makes perfect sense for the creator to be able to have control over what appears in the thread to keep it on topic and the trolls at bay. It's pretty rare to see a post where someone asks a question that doesn't quickly devolve into an offtopic mess, and the creator is usually attacked for trying to bring it back on topic. This has made Reddit useless for question-answering (and besides, the most upvoted answer is almost always wrong.)
Is the purpose of these forums to enable authentic conversation, or just to farm content regardless of quality (to be sold to AI companies, presumably)?
-
But the dearth of genuine political discussion here is a problem for the people who do want it
It's not genuine if we don't want to constantly have to expose ourselves to toxic bigots or "smooth" manipulators who think it's not really toxic bigotry if they are "just asking questions?"
It's not genuine if we don't want to start every single discussion of something bad Trump did with rebutting a half dozen versions of "but whatabout that time when dems..."?
I've said it before and I'll say it again:
I will not be shamed into allowing toxicity into my life, on social media or otherwise, in the name of "avoiding an echo chamber." NOTHING is stopping a conservative from coming here and making cogent, factual arguments, aside from their own fragility.
The conservatives who "can't" post to Lemmy are the ones who don't know how to have an actual conversation and get banned. What fraction of conservatives that represents is an excercise left to the reader. But I've got my own opinion on that number for sure.
The fact that you characterise natural ways of engaging in a discussion negatively doesn't mean it's not genuine, and it doesn't mean you're forced to look at it if it's available.
NOTHING is stopping a conservative from coming here and making cogent, factual arguments, aside from their own fragility.
The structure of vote-based social media makes it difficult, and the people who, rather than remove themselves from places where arguments happen, shout down the people having the arguments, stops this from happening.
You'd be right to point out that conservative-majority spaces are just as, if not more guilty of this, but that doesn't make it less true.
The conservatives who “can’t” post to Lemmy are the ones who don’t know how to have an actual conversation and get banned.
That's true but it's not the only thing that's going on.
-
Maybe you should re-read my original comment? Because unless you think that Lemmy is not a left wing echo chamber then I have no clue what you're arguing about here exactly.
wrote last edited by [email protected]Maybe I misread you. I think I'm being told not only that it is an echo chamber, but that I'm supposed to be bothered by it.
Meanwhile I haven't seen an argument for what we'd gain by having more conservatives here, or what's stopping those unicorn conservatives who aren't raging assholes from posting.
-
This post did not contain any content.
Lemmy was architected by people whose philosophical intentions are out of alignment with the software they cloned.
That system was designed to invite as many idiots as possible, to bait as much engagement as possible, with virtually no controls on quality or intelligence.
Well congratulations Lemmy, you've made the next Reddit. There's no reason to be here, it's just a pile of morons for the most part.
-
The same issue Bluesky and other app-killer platforms have/had at the start: momentum. Momentum explains everything else. If you leave out the vapid content on Reddit, it's still the premier place for asking questions and getting them answered by enthusiastic amateurs or actual experts in the field. The moment Lemmy gets the same quality tech support and DIY responses, it will have its place. Or, like with Bluesky, Reddit needs to become as alienating and disgusting as X became after the Elon takeover.
Reddit is useless for questions. If you're a subject-matter expert in something, find the subreddit for it and prepare to be horrified.
-
The fact that you characterise natural ways of engaging in a discussion negatively doesn't mean it's not genuine, and it doesn't mean you're forced to look at it if it's available.
NOTHING is stopping a conservative from coming here and making cogent, factual arguments, aside from their own fragility.
The structure of vote-based social media makes it difficult, and the people who, rather than remove themselves from places where arguments happen, shout down the people having the arguments, stops this from happening.
You'd be right to point out that conservative-majority spaces are just as, if not more guilty of this, but that doesn't make it less true.
The conservatives who “can’t” post to Lemmy are the ones who don’t know how to have an actual conversation and get banned.
That's true but it's not the only thing that's going on.
wrote last edited by [email protected]The fact that you characterise natural ways of engaging in a discussion negatively doesn’t mean it’s not genuine,
It's natural to ask questions. It's natural to point out hypocrisy.
JAQing off and Whataboutism are not those things.
Edit: And frankly, having to explain that in regard to my comment above is precisely what I love not having to constantly do at Lemmy. (Because people both understand the difference, and don't pretend not to.)
it doesn’t mean you’re forced to look at it if it’s available.
The case being made here is that this is a left wing echo chamber, and that I am not interested in genuine discussion if I either don't think it is, or don't care that it is.
I have provided examples of trolling, toxic behavior.
I do not want trolling, toxic behavior here. It is not welcome by me in the community, whether I'm forced to look at it or not.
I'm also not supporting (and nor am I aware of any such thing existing) some kind of a blanket ban on conservatives. They are the folks always telling people to man up, grab themselves by their bootstraps, have the courage of their convictions, etc etc. Guess they need to take some of their own advice if it's a little rough sometimes trying to push authoritarianism and bigotry in some spaces. And if they get banned because they have forgotten how to talk to people who don't already agree with them, I can't find it in me to care.
I will not be shamed into allowing toxicity into my life, on social media or otherwise, in the name of “avoiding an echo chamber.”
-
Speaking of bad faith..
Yes, and just like Trump, I'm not speaking of the white nationalists and nazies.
"So you know what, it’s fine. You’re changing history. You’re changing culture. And you had people -- and I’m not talking about the neo-Nazis and the white nationalists -- because they should be condemned totally. But you had many people in that group other than neo-Nazis and white nationalists. Okay? And the press has treated them absolutely unfairly.
"Now, in the other group also, you had some fine people. But you also had troublemakers, and you see them come with the black outfits and with the helmets, and with the baseball bats. You had a lot of bad people in the other group."
Note that this is the second statement he made, which he had to make after being called out by the media for seemingly supporting the neonazi protestors. Which, given his history at that point and subsequently, it's pretty obvious that the media was right and he was just back tracking due to bad publicity.
-
Fair enough about
literal religious nutspeople of firmly held religious convictions. This side of the pond there are very few of those, fortunately. My basic point is that plenty of people who vote "wrong" (Trump, for example) would actually agree with you on most of your vision of the good society. The questions are mainly over how to get there. This IMO is the tragedy of democratic politics today, and specifically the USA. An almost absolute breakdown in communication.Yes, I agree with that. I try to inject a little counter culture whenever a wade into the mainstream, but generally avoid it because I find it very saddening.
-
Maybe you should re-read my original comment? Because unless you think that Lemmy is not a left wing echo chamber then I have no clue what you're arguing about here exactly.
OK, have crawled up the context tree, and don't see where you think I've misunderstood your point. You think it's an echo chamber (I do not) and you think that's bad (I do not) and apparently I'm supposed to feel a little sheepish about not wanting shitty people with shitty behavior here at Lemmy. (I do not.)
-
Maybe I misread you. I think I'm being told not only that it is an echo chamber, but that I'm supposed to be bothered by it.
Meanwhile I haven't seen an argument for what we'd gain by having more conservatives here, or what's stopping those unicorn conservatives who aren't raging assholes from posting.
The issue with echo chambers is that they reinforce people’s existing beliefs instead of challenging them. That often comes with extreme hostility toward anyone who doesn’t share those beliefs. If the left in the US wants to win elections they need people to vote for them who might have voted right in the past. In order to achieve this, minds needs to be changed, and that doesn't happen in echo chambers. I’m sure you can see the value in a left-leaning person going to a place like Truth Social and, in a calm and respectful way, arguing against the claims they disagree with. Well, in my view, Lemmy could use something similar.
I also don’t think right-wingers are the only ones to blame when it comes to the breakdown of polite discussion. If you put someone who feels just as strongly about the left as people here feel about the right, it’s no surprise it turns into a mudslinging match. It takes two to tango.
-
I think there is a feature request to allow communities to subscribe to other communities so that their posts and comments are synced.
Great, so the duplication happens automatically! This is solving the wrong problem, IMHO...
-
The issue with echo chambers is that they reinforce people’s existing beliefs instead of challenging them. That often comes with extreme hostility toward anyone who doesn’t share those beliefs. If the left in the US wants to win elections they need people to vote for them who might have voted right in the past. In order to achieve this, minds needs to be changed, and that doesn't happen in echo chambers. I’m sure you can see the value in a left-leaning person going to a place like Truth Social and, in a calm and respectful way, arguing against the claims they disagree with. Well, in my view, Lemmy could use something similar.
I also don’t think right-wingers are the only ones to blame when it comes to the breakdown of polite discussion. If you put someone who feels just as strongly about the left as people here feel about the right, it’s no surprise it turns into a mudslinging match. It takes two to tango.
wrote last edited by [email protected]I’m sure you can see the value in a left-leaning person going to a place like Truth Social and, in a calm and respectful way, arguing against the claims they disagree with. Well, in my view, Lemmy could use something similar.
In my view, again, nothing is stopping them. They either know how to have an adult discussion or they don't. Plenty of people on Lemmy who also disagree with them will back them up for that if they can actually have an adult conversation. Probably even me, but since I've not seen that happen yet, tough to say!
I also don’t think right-wingers are the only ones to blame when it comes to the breakdown of polite discussion.
You are entitled to your own opinion.
-
Note that this is the second statement he made, which he had to make after being called out by the media for seemingly supporting the neonazi protestors. Which, given his history at that point and subsequently, it's pretty obvious that the media was right and he was just back tracking due to bad publicity.
This is where the "fine people on both sides" quote originates from.
Snopes article on the matter.
-
This is where the "fine people on both sides" quote originates from.
Snopes article on the matter.
wrote last edited by [email protected]Yeah, and it specifically ignores that the statement you posted was the second, clarifying statement days later. Snopes is going off what he said he meant, not actually what he said. Check the United the Right wiki page for the actual timeline.
Stop letting other people think for you.
Trump did not respond to the torchlight parade on Friday night or the demonstrations on Saturday morning until 1:19 pm on Saturday, August 12, when he tweeted, "We ALL must be united & condemn all that hate stands for. There is no place for this kind of violence in America. Lets come together as one!"[284][33]
At the bill-signing ceremony, Trump said that "we condemn in the strongest possible terms this egregious display of hatred, bigotry and violence on many sides, on many sides".[284][33][288][289] He added that it had been "going on for a long time in our country. Not Donald Trump, not Barack Obama. A long, long time" and that "a swift restoration of law and order" was now vital.[289]
A statement attributed to an unnamed White House spokesperson was released the next day, asserting that "The President said very strongly in his statement yesterday that he condemns all forms of violence, bigotry, and hatred. Of course that includes white supremacists, KKK, Neo-Nazi and all extremist groups. He called for national unity and bringing all Americans together
...
After the backlash for his remarks, Trump read a statement from a teleprompter two days later at the White House.[310][292] He said that "anyone who acted criminally in this weekend's racist violence, you will be held fully accountable."[287] and that "[r]acism is evil. And those who cause violence in its name are criminals and thugs, including the K.K.K., neo-Nazis, white supremacists and other hate groups that are repugnant to everything we hold dear as Americans."[311]
The closest they have is the unattributed statement, again after the fact, trying to clarify what he said wasn't what he meant. Like they always do.
-
This seems to be a reply to another comment.
It's a reply to your comment about downotes. The point of votes is to rank threads, and the point of ranking threads is to promote cogent comments and avoid irrelevance, misinformation, and malice. I do this in real life and I do it here.
